PEACE AT WHAT PRICE?
Statement in Response to U.S. Facilitated Peace Agreement
Between the DRC and Rwanda
June 28, 2025 - Yesterday, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Republic of Rwanda officially signed a peace agreement in Washington, D.C., facilitated by the United States and observed by Qatar. While the signing marks a significant milestone in regional diplomacy, Congolese civil society continues to express both deep concern and cautious resolve.
Since M23's resurgence in November 2021, more than 7,000 civilians have been killed and over 500,000 newly displaced since January 2025 alone. The DRC now holds one of Africa's largest internally displaced populations, with over 7.8 million uprooted and over a million refugees in neighboring countries. In North and South Kivu, M23 and Rwandan forces have committed grave violations including summary executions, murder, widespread sexual violence, forced labor, and deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure. With rampant impunity, a proliferation of armed actors in eastern Congo are committing abuses which the UN says may constitute crimes against humanity and war crimes under international law.
The agreement includes respect for both countries' territorial integrity, prohibition of hostilities with conditional integration of non-state armed actors, unhindered humanitarian access, reaffirmation of MONUSCO's mandate, and regional economic integration. Notably, the agreement establishes a Joint Security Coordination Mechanism to promote operationalization of the October 31st, 2024 CONOPS, specifying FDLR neutralization as a condition for lifting Rwanda's defensive measures.
While these provisions represent meaningful commitments on paper, serious questions remain about enforcement and implementation. The Joint Security Coordination Mechanism fundamentally relies on the parties to resolve their own dispute, an approach that ignores the very conflict history that made this agreement necessary. A Joint Oversight Committee comprising the United States, Qatar, and the African Union will monitor implementation, but given the history of broken agreements between these countries, this committee's ability to apply meaningful pressure will be the crucial test of the accord's viability.
The agreement's most troubling aspect lies in the last-minute concessions around Rwandan troop withdrawal. While the United States initially sought to require Rwanda to withdraw its forces before signing, this condition was dropped after Rwanda made FDLR neutralization a prerequisite. During the ceremony, Rwanda's Foreign Minister Nduhungirehe declared FDLR neutralization the "bedrock of peace and security" and the only condition for lifting Rwanda's "defensive measures." This deeply concerns Congolese people, as FDLR forces are small in number compared with other armed groups in the east of DRC and reportedly located in territories controlled by Rwanda-backed M23, creating a paradox where Rwanda conditions its withdrawal on neutralizing forces in areas it effectively controls through proxies.
This circular logic legitimizes Rwanda's continued military presence in the DRC while shifting compliance responsibility to forces beyond the Congolese government control. Despite well-documented UN evidence of Rwanda's support for M23, the agreement allows indefinite maintenance of "defensive measures." The absence of M23 as a signatory compounds these problems—while conditional integration suggests a pathway for inclusion, the rebel group will likely reject the accord initially, rendering key provisions moot. The conditional integration provision raises serious accountability concerns, as those responsible for war crimes cannot simply be absorbed into legitimate structures without facing justice.
Furthermore, the exclusion of local communities and civil society from negotiations deepens the disconnect between diplomacy and reality. As civil society leader Nene Bintu, a member of PAEMA DRC’s advocacy* cohort, stated: "The issue of war victims must be on the table....any agreement that fails to explicitly uphold the terms of UN Resolution 2773, which calls for the immediate withdrawal of all armed groups from eastern Congo, is not only incomplete, but in direct contradiction with international commitments already made." Jean Felix Mwema, Congolese activist and a PAEMA Cohort member, expressed similar concerns: "I wish to express my deep concern over the lack of transparency in the current process. Without guarantees for transparency, accountability, and local participation, we risk repeating the errors of the past."
This agreement must be seen as a starting point requiring broader inclusion of regional actors like Burundi and Uganda as they have also played a role in supporting or tolerating armed group activity in eastern Congo. While regional economic integration offers potential benefits, such initiatives must be transparently managed and tied to genuine security improvements. Given that this is not the first peace agreement between the DRC and Rwanda—with previous attempts having failed—the Joint Oversight Committee's willingness to impose consequences for violations will determine whether this agreement suffers the same fate.
Sustainable peace must be built from the ground up, with the voices of those most affected at its core. Civil society stands ready to play its role in monitoring the implementation of this agreement, documenting its impact, and holding all parties—Congolese, Rwandan, and international—accountable to their promises.
The road ahead demands vigilance, courage, and integrity. This agreement's silence on transitional justice remains a profound failing. True peace cannot be built on a foundation of impunity. We demand that all parties involved in these negotiations reckon with past atrocities and commit to establishing credible transitional justice mechanisms for the millions of Congolese who have lost their lives and suffered through three decades of seemingly endless conflict. Those who broker peace have a moral obligation to address injustices; without justice, there can be no lasting peace.
______________
PAEMA works to prevent mass atrocities, pursue justice, and build sustainable peace in conflict-affected regions by connecting local communities with international stakeholders. PAEMA's DRC Advocacy Cohort provides Congolese civil society representatives with platforms to inform U.S. foreign policy toward the DRC, bringing key issues to the international stage while promoting engagement based on democracy, transparency, and human rights, particularly for communities affected by natural resource exploitation. The Cohort ensures that local realities inform U.S. policy formulation in the DRC.
For further information, contact Lauren Fortgang, at lauren@paema.ngo